MEETING DATE: 05/03/10
AGENDA ITEM: (1) Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; (2) Approval of
the Final Plans and Specifications; and (3) Authorization to
Advertise for Bids for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping
Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge), P-900 - American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus Funds),
Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021).
ATTACHMENTS
Page|109| Location Map 1
2 Final Construction Plans and Specifications (To conserve
resources, these documents are not attached but are on file
with City Clerk's office)|109| Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study 2-42|109| Proposed Resolution 43-4400 1-
coutxt-"(
LiarzfgzIr
•
- - - - - - - -
--S-75,0MEL Nra,
/ ---c/L Or
wow neve
-
BALLON4 CREEK
--s---
-;;;;;;;; --------- —
detz OiEWAVO
DA-1lk- F(15Z DIG
1111* , 101
4,416
!tV
SERWS SOUTNIN ISuFsdw, eoLVIES
ocrar / LACOFW RENEW MIAMI DUI 3/11/10
-
„1,, ,,grcm Isc.-wrz.1#
.011C. 1N-52-01.2 SI, 2 (11,
.LOCArroo Khoo
REVISION
Or p . [PAP
APpR DATE
t. OP 37 $1,0
CITY OF CIJLVER. CITY
MLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
EIMINEEWNG UNISON - CVLVM CDT. eAs,
BAUDNA CURE Mira mom, EI-SOO
mil. MO PHOWCI ISPL-Ss4o Om)MITIGAi ED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND INITIAL STUDY
FOR
BALLONA CREEK BIKEWAY PROJECT, P-900
Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021)
Prepared for:
City of Culver City
Public Works Department
9770 Culver Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232-0507
Prepared by:
Comprehensive 'Nanning Services
2916 Clay Street
Newport Beach, California 92663
(949) 650-3206
Contact: _Joann Lombardo, Principal Consultant
In association with:
Lawrence R. Moss &_ Associates
3458 Ocean View Boulevard
Glendale, California, 91208
(818) 248.5200
Contact: Jaime Yamashita, Associate ASLA
March 30, 2010
Revised April 5, 2010TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Preface i
Executive Summary I
Purpose and Scope I
Project Description I
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 9
Determination 9
Evaluation of Environmental Effects 10
Environmental Impacts._ I I
Mandatory Findings of Significance 30
Mitigation Monitoring Report 30
Sources Cited in Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 31
List of Preparers 31
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit No. Page No.
I. Project Location Map. 2
2. Project Concept Plan. 4
3. Proposed Improvements Over Aerial Photo 4
4. Proposed Cross-Section of Path 5
5. View Simulation of Entry Gate 6
6. View Simulation of Path 6
7. Existing Path Condition Photo 7
8. Project Bioswale System 23
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page No.
I. Comparison of Project Construction Emissions to SCAQMD Thresholds (Summer) 14
2. Comparison of Project Construction Emissions to SCAQMD Thresholds (Winter) 14
LIST OF APPENDICES
A. URBEMIS Air Quality Model Run for Proposed Ballona Creek Bikeway Project 32
3PREFACE
This revised Initial Study updates the Environmental Checklist Form previously presented in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Initial Study for Ballona Creek Bikeway Project, P-900 Federal Aid Project No. Espl-
5240 (021), dated March 30, 2010 (Existing Initial Study). The updates consist of the following:
I. Add new item f) "Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?" to Section IX (Hydrology and Water
Quality), and renumber subsequent items of Section IX "h" through "j".
2. Change the wording of item a) of Section XVI (Transportation/Traffic) from: "Cause an increase in
traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e.,
result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?" to "Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?"
3. Change the wording of item b) of Section XVI (Transportation/Traffic) from; "Exceed, either
individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?" to "Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand
measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?"
4.
Delete item 0 of Section XVI (Transportation/Traffic) that read: "Result in inadequate parking
capacity?"
5.
Change the numbering and wording of item g) of Section )(VI (Transportation/Traffic) from: "Conflict
with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?" to new numbered item 0 "Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding
public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?"
The updated Environmental Checklist Form wording and numbering matches that found in the CEQA
Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000— 15387) available
from http://leginfo.ca.gov
as of January I, 2010. This updated Environmental Checklist Form wording and
numbering is published by the State of California to present "a sample form and may be tailored to satisfy
individual agencies' needs and project circumstances" (Association of Environmental Professionals 2010 CEQA
Guidelines Appendices; CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(0).
The updated wording for Hydrology and Water Quality and Transportation/Traffic items was not included in
the Existing Initial Study because issues regarding water quality, congestion management compliance and
adopted bicycle facility policies are fully addressed in the applicable sections of the Existing Initial Study.
The Environmental Checklist Form presented in this revised Initial Study conforms to the City of Culver City's
current CEQA Checklist format. This revised Initial Study does not result in a substantial change to the
project, mitigation measures, or findings regarding potentially significant impacts. This revised Initial Study
Ballona Creek Bikeway Project
Page i
Initial Studymerely makes insignificant modifications to the Existing Initial Study. Consequently, pursuant to 15073.5 of the
CEQA Checklist, recirculation of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required.
Baliona Creek Bikeway improvement Project
Initial Study
Page iiENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This Initial Study assesses the potential environmental impacts of construction and operation of the Ballona Creek
Bikeway Improvement Project, located along the north side of the Ballona Creek between Overland Avenue and the
Pedestrian Bridge which crosses from Ocean Avenue, within Culver City. This Initial Study finds that the proposed
project could have a significant adverse impact on biological resources related to compliance with the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA). The project proposes to remove 14 existing trees to accommodate bikeway improvements. The
trees could contain nesting birds, the disturbance of which could violate the MBTA. To ensure that removal of the
existing trees do not impact nesting birds, Mitigation Measure B10-1 is recommended for inclusion to the project. This
measure would reduce potential impacts to migratory bird species to a less than significant level. Consequently, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared for the project.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This Initial Study serves as the environmental review of the proposed project, as required pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. The proposed project is Ballona
Creek Bikeway Project, located along the north side of the Balboa Creek between Overland Avenue and the Pedestrian
Bridge in the City of Culver City.
In accordance with Section 15378(a)(1) of the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines), the City of
Culver City (City) is required to prepare an Initial Study to determine if the proposed project may have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. This Initial Study is intended to be an informational document providing the Culver
City City Council, other public agencies, and the general public with an objective assessment of the potential
environmental impacts that could result from the implementation of the proposed project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
I. Project title: Ballona Creek Bikeway Project, P-900, Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021)
2. Lead agency name and address: Culver City Public Works Department; P.O. Box 507; 9770 Culver
Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90232-0507.
3. Contact person and phone number: Lee Torres, Associate Engineer, Public Works / Engineering Division:
(310) 253-5623.
4. Project location: The Ballona Creek Bikeway travels through Culver City in an east/west direction,
connecting to the coastal bike path in Marina del Rey. The bikeway project is located along the north
side of the Ballona Creek between Overland Avenue and the Pedestrian Bridge which crosses from
Ocean Avenue approximately 960 feet to the west of Overland Avenue. (See Exhibit I, Project
Location Map, below.)
Balboa Creek Bikeway Project
Page 1
Initial Studyeuker E!ity Senior
High School
1 at 1,
iniag eJNAS A
0 26074S'are born
t
2007-Naviq
E .uiver qty. !kr.
Mid le ' .chool,
5. Project sponsor's name and address: Culver City Public Works Department; P.O. Box 507; 9770 Culver
Boulevard; Culver City, CA 90232-0507
General Plan Designation: Ballona Creek Special Study Area Open Space.
7. Zoning: Open Space.
Exhibit 1: Project Location Map
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project,
and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.)
The bikeway segment to be improved is approximately 960 feet long and 35 feet wide. The
proposed improvements are intended to enhance the path segment's layout and appearance and
create a pleasing environment for both cyclists and pedestrians moving along this segment of the
path. Path users are expected to include library patrons, school students, nearby residents, and
other persons traveling along the bikeway.
The project would include the following components:
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 2
Initial Studya Removal of concrete embankment along the upslope side of the bike path (between the
bike path and the school properties). Other materials, including concrete strips and
fencing, also would be removed.
Removal of non-native plantings (including various trees, shrubs and groundcover) along
the Julian Dixon Public Library and adjacent County service roadway. A total of 19 trees
would be removed, all of which are located at the bikeway east entrance adjacent to
Overland. These trees to be removed consist of 7 Cypress, 6 Eucalyptus, and I
Podocarpus. (Other existing trees would be retained in place).
• Installation of a decomposed granite (DG) pedestrian path, with concrete installed at
East entrance adjacent to Overland to accommodate the slope of the path in this
location.
• Installation of pedestrian handrails at the easternmost segment to accommodate slope. .
• Installation of river rock veneer retaining wall of up to 4-feet along the length of the path
adjacent to the upslope.
• Installation of various concrete curbs and mowstrips around new plantings areas.
Installation of irrigation in planting areas. Irrigation will be low-volume water conserving
system, powered by one controller, one backflow preventer, and a new water meter.
Water meter will be located on Overland, and the controller and bacIdlow preventer will
be adjacent to the library.
• Planting of drought tolerant and Southern California native plants appropriate to the
creek habitat. Plants will include a variety of trees, shrubs, groundcovers and hydroseed
mix.
• Installation of enhanced 6-feet tall fencing between the service roadway and creek
channel, and between the bike path and creek channel.
• Relocation and enhancement of the entry gate at the service roadway entrance to the
creek located off of Overland Avenue and adjacent to the library building.
• Repair or repaving of the bike path along this portion of the bike path.
• Installation of lighting, emergency "call-boxes," and security cameras along this portion
of the bike path.
• Installation of educational displays regarding the creek and the project.
• Installation of drainage devices and a bio-swale to capture storm run-off.
Exhibits 2 through 7 depict the proposed bikeway improvements graphically. Exhibit 2 presents
the concept plan, including path and landscape improvements. Exhibit 3 overlays the proposed
bikeway improvements on an aerial photograph of the project site, showing locations of new
fencing, decorative gate, pedestrian path, bike path, interpretive signage, caution signage, lights,
"Call-boxes," security camera, vegetation and bioswale/infiltration areas. Exhibit 4 is a cross-
section of the proposed path, including the 12-foot asphalt bikeway, 3-foot decomposed granite
pedestrian path, river rock retaining wall, and planted slope within native trees, shrubs and
groundcover. Exhibit 5 presents a view simulation of the proposed entry gate, showing before and
after conditions. Exhibit 6 presents a view simulation of the proposed project, including the asphalt
bike path, decomposed granite pedestrian path, river rock retaining wall, vegetation and tubular
steel fencing; existing conditions also are shown.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 3
Initial StudyBaIforia Creek Bikeway Project
Aerial View of Site
— NEW FENCES
DECORATIVE GATE
— PEDESTRIAN PATH
BIKE PATH
VEGETATION
BIOSWALEINF I LTRATION
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
CAUTION SIGNAGE
LIGHTS
SECURITY CAMERA
ENTRY.
•TREATME
DECORATIVE GATE-
RI FF,NCE
Z•A7,
PROPOSED MATERIALS:
-R/VER ROCK RETAINING WALL
-DOUBLE PIPE RAIL FENCE
-DECORATIVE GATE & FENCE AT ENTRY
-DECOMPOSED GRANITE
TRENCH DkAos
Exhibit 2: Project Concept Plan
Exhibit 3: Proposed Improvements Over Aerial Photo
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 4
Initial StudyDesign Overview - Perspectives
Proposed entrance gate
and pedestrian path
Before
Awg.st 29. 209t
BALLONA CREEK BIKEWAY .PROJECT
k
PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE PATH WITH SLOPE AND ADJACENT PLANTING
Exhibit 4: Proposed Cross-Section of Path
Exhibit 5: View Simulation of Entry Gate
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 5
Initial Study
10Design Overview — Perspectives
Proposed bike path
improvements
BALLONA CREEK 1.31KEWAY PROJECT
Exhibit 6: View Simulation of Project
Balboa Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 6
Initial Study9. Existing land uses on the project site: (Briefly describe the project's existing features)
Before settlement of the City of Los Angeles, Ballona Creek was a natural waterway. As the Los
Angeles area urbanized, flooding of the creek became a hazard to the surrounding community. In
the late 1930's, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) built a concrete-lined flood control
channel along the creek to control the flooding. Today, Ballona Creek is a 9-mile long flood
protection channel that drains the Los Angeles basin, from the Santa Monica mountains on the
north, the Harbor Freeway (110) on the east, and the Baldwin Hills on the south. In the 1970's and
1980's the bikeway was included within the creek channel to provide recreation opportunities. The
Ballona Creek Bikeway system is an approximately 10- to 12-foot wide paved Class I path along the
north bank of the channel with transition ramps to the path at key intersections of major streets
(Slauson Avenue, Sawtelle Boulevard, Sepulveda Boulevard, Overland Avenue, Duquesne Avenue,
and National Boulevard). The path starts at Syd Kronenthal Park just upstream from National
Boulevard and traverses southwest along the entire length of Ballona Creek to the Santa Monica
Bay.
Currently, the bikeway segment to be improved through this project (Ballona Creek between
Overland Avenue and the Pedestrian Bridge) consists of a concrete embankment, an approximately
12 foot wide asphalt paved path, separated from the creek and adjacent land uses with chain link
fencing. (See Exhibit 7, Existing Path Photograph, below. Also reference "Before" photos in
Exhibits 5 and 6, above.)
Exhibit 7: Existing Path Condition Photo
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 7
Initial Study
1 2-10. Surrounding land uses and setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings)
The bikeway project is directly north of BaIlona Creek west of Overland Avenue. It is directly south
of the Julian Dixon County Public Library, Culver City High School, Culver City Middle School,
Farragut Elementary School.
11.
Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
Construction of the Project is proposed to be funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment
•
Act and State of California Resource Agency Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation
Program. Permits and permission to construct the project must be obtained from the Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works, Los Angeles County Public Library and the Culver City
Unified School District.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
fnitial Study
Page 8
/3Date:
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that
is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
0 Aesthetics
D Agriculture Resources
CI Air Quality
0 Biological Resources
0 Cultural Resources
0 Geology/Soils (Liquefaction)
0 Hazards & Hazard Materials
0 Hydrology/Water Quality
El Land Use and Planning
0 Mineral Resources
0 Noise
0 Population/Housing
0 Public Services
0 Recreation
O Transportation/Traffic
0 Utilities/Service Systems
O Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
X
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached pages have been added to the project. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact or
"potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant
effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature:
Printed Name: L .I7-)E. 7 0 65222 .e Title:
41 G I a-o i
PYK. ( PiCn07:1- ,
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 9
Initial Study
/IfEVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
An Environmental Checklist Form (Form) has been used to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated
with the proposed project. The Form has been prepared by the Resources Agency of California to assist local
governmental agencies, such as Culver City, in complying with the requirements of the Statutes and Guidelines for
implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. In the Form, environmental effects are evaluated as follows:
I. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in its response. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the
referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g.,
the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is "Potentially Significant", "Less Than Significant With Mitigation", or "Less Than
Significant". "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be
significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR
is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact."
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less
than significant level (mitigation measures from an "Earlier Analyses," as described in #5 below, may be cross-
referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier ER or negative declaration. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the
following:
(a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning 'ordinances).
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
(a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question.
(b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 10
Initial StudyENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
I. a),b). No Impact. The project site is located in an existing bikeway adjacent to a concrete channel. It is an urbanized
area surrounded by public and residential land uses. The site and its surrounds are generally flat. Fourteen trees
would be removed to accommodate project improvements. These trees to be removed consist of 7 Cypress, 6
Eucalyptus, and 1 Podocarpus. None of these trees are protected by existing City policies or otherwise recognized as
a scenic resource. There are no designated scenic vistas or resources on or adjacent to the site. Consequently, the
project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or resource.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character
and quality of the site and its surroundings?
X
I. c). No Impact. The project would improve the appearance and function of the bikeway. As illustrated 'n Exhibits 5
and 6, the project would substantially enhance the visual appearance of the path and the adjacent embankment.
Consequently, the project would benefit, not substantially degrade, the existing visual character and quality of the site
and its surroundings.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
X
I. d). Less Than Significant. The project includes new pole mounted lighting fixtures and in-ground uplighting to
illuminate the path. There would be 9 pole mounted lights; each would be 16 feet high, spaced approximately 100 feet
apart, and located just behind (north of) the proposed retaining wall The up lights would be 12 inches in diameter
and 2.94 inches high. Both the pole and up lights would operate from dusk (5 — 6:00 pm) to 11 pm. and from 4 - 5:00
am to dawn. The lights would provide visibility and security to nighttime and early morning users. All project lights
would be directed toward the path, and away from adjacent properties or streets. Adjacent land uses, which include
the library and schools, are primarily daytime operations, and are not expected to be affected by the nighttime and
early morning lighting. Consequently, project impacts related to the creation of a new source of substantial light or
glare would be less than significant.
II. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
X
BaIlona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 11
Initial Study
I(ePotentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)) or timberland (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 4526)
X
d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X
II. a), b), c). No Impact The project site is located in an existing bikeway adjacent to a concrete channel. It is an
urbanized area surrounded by public and residential land uses. No agricultural uses or forests occur on or adjacent to
the site. Neither the site nor surrounding properties are identified as a Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance ("Farmland"); neither the site nor surrounding properties contain Williamson Act contracts.
The project site is not zoned for agricultural uses or forest. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project
to impact agricultural or forest resources.
III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
III. a). No Impact Culver City and the project site are within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by
the Pacific Ocean to the south and west and mountains to the north and east. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin
is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAB has a history of recorded air
quality violations and is an area where both state and federal ambient air quality standards are exceeded. Because of
the violations of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the California Clean Air Act requires
triennial preparation of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) to achieve the standards. The SCAQMD prepares
the basin's air quality management plans with technical and policy inputs from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the California Air Resource Board (CARB), and the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG), updating the plans every three years. The most recent plan is the 2007 AQMP.
The project would improve an existing bikeway that is identified in the City of Culver City General Plan as the Ballona
Creek Focused Special Study Area. The proposed improvements are consistent with the established General Plan
provisions for the area. The improvements are intended to enhance bicycle and pedestrian travel for existing trail
recreational users, students, library patrons, and nearby residents. The Project is designed to help restore natural
habitat, enhance the creek and bike path environment, and create educational opportunities for users of the bike path.
The project would not increase population, and consequently would have no growth-inducing impacts and would not
exceed established regional population or growth projections. The project is consistent with the Air Quality
Management Plan, as well as the goals of Culver City. It would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
X
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 12
Initial Study
/7Less Than
Potentially Significant Less than
Significant With Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
b). Less Than Significant. Relative to the bikeway project, air quality impacts would occur during construction, which
would include demolition, grading and site preparation and construction activities. Major sources of emissions during
construction include exhaust emissions generated by heavy equipment and vehicles, fugitive dust generated as a result of
soil and material disturbance during demolition and grading activities, and the emission of reactive organic compounds
during site paving and painting of structures. SCAQMD recommends use of the URBEM1S2007 Version 9.2.2 model to
estimate project construction air emissions.
The URBEM1S model evaluates emissions for a number of pollutants which the SCAQMD has developed suggested
significance thresholds based on the volume of pollution emitted. According to SCAQMD, any construction project in the
Basin with daily emissions that exceed any of the following thresholds should be considered as having an individually and
cumulatively significant air quality impact:
ROG (reactive organic gases) (75 lbs./day during construction)
NOx (oxides of nitrogen) (100 lbsIday during construction)
CO (carbon monoxide) (550 lbs./day during construction)
PM-10 (respirable 10-micron diameter particulate matter) (ISO lbs./day during construction)
PM- 2.3 (respirable 2.5-micron diameter particulate matter) (55 lbs./day during construction).
The URBEM1S model also measures CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions, for which thresholds of significance have not yet
been established. CO2 is a primary gas that contributes to global warming and is largely caused by human use of fossil
fuels. (Reference Greenhouse Gas discussion, Section VII.)
To mitigate construction related air quality impacts, SCAQMD has established Rule 403 that governs fugitive dust
emissions from construction projects. This rule sets forth a list of control measures that must be undertaken for all
construction projects to ensure that no dust emissions from the project are visible beyond the property boundaries.
Adherence to Rule 403 is mandatory and as such, does not denote mitigation under CEQA. The URBEM1S model run
presented in this analysis assumes the use of the minimal measures specified in Rule 403. These measures include: soil
stabilizers shall be applied to all disturbed, inactive areas; ground cover shall be quickly applied in all disturbed areas; active
construction site shall be watered twice daily; soil transfer shall be controlled; stockpiles shall be covered with tarps; and
unpaved haul roads shall be watered twice daily.
The URBEMIS model run assumes that construction occurs over an approximately 6 month period. Because, at this time,
it is not known if construction will occur during summer or winter months, both scenarios were calculated. Table I
presents the findings of the model run assuming most of the construction occurs during summer months; and Table 2
presents the findings of the model run assuming most of the construction occurs during winter months. As shown in the
tables, construction emissions generated by the project would be well below SCAQMD established thresholds
regardless of whether construction occurs during summer or winter months.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project Page 13
Initial Study
lbTABLE I
COMPARISON OF PROJECT CONSTRUCT/ON EMISSIONS (Ballona Creek Bikeway)
TO SCAQMD THRESHOLDS
(LB.IDAY) [I] Summer
ROG CO NOx Particulates
(PM 10)
Particulates
(PM2.5)
CO2
CONSTRUCTION 2.95 13.27 24.27 . 5.02 1.91 2,349.49
EMISSIONS
SCAQMD
75.00 550.00 100.00 150.00 55.00 150.00
THRESHOLDS
Amount in Excess of or
Below (-) Thresholds -72.05 -336.73 -75.73 -144.98 -53.09 2,199.49
TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS (Ballona Creek Bikeway)
TO SCAQMD THRESHOLDS
(LB./DAY) [1] Winter
RUG CO NOx Particulates Particulates CO2
(PM10) (PM2.5)
CONSTRUCTION 2.95 13.27 24.27 6.23 1.12 2,349.49
EMISSIONS
SCAQMD
75.00 550.00 100.00 150.00 55.00 150.00
THRESHOLDS
Amount in Excess of or
Below (-) Thresholds -72.05 -536.73 -75.73 -143.77 -53.88 2,199.49
Operational emissions include mobile source emissions generated by vehicles driving to and from the proposed land
uses, and area source emissions generated by project heating and electrical systems. Because the project is a bike and
pedestrian path, vehicular emissions would be limited to maintenance vehicles that would visit the path approximately
52 times per year. The proposed
plants would be drought tolerant and lighting would be solar-activated. Electrical
energy required to operate the call-boxes and cameras is expected to be less than significant. Consequently,
operation emissions associated with the project would be nominal, and no significant adverse air quality impacts from
operational activities are expected to occur.
The project's potential to violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality
violation is less than significant.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions with exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
III. c). Less Than Significant. In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, any project that does not exceed or can be
mitigated to less than the daily threshold values does not add significantly to a cumulative impact. The project is of a
size and type such that it does not result in emissions above SCAQMD thresholds; and consequently, the project's
cumulative impact to air quality would be less than significant.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Initial Study
Page 14d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
111. d). Less Than Significant. Sensitive receptors include residential uses, schools, child care centers, acute care
hospitals, and long-term health care facilities. These are facilities whose inhabitants are typically more sensitive to air
pollutant emissions either because of the duration of exposure or because of the inhabitant's age or infirmity.
Sensitive receptors near the bikeway include Culver City High School, Culver City Middle School, Farragut
Elementary School and Julian Dixon County Public Library.
In addition to the daily SCAQMD thresholds presented above, project construction has the potential to raise
localized ambient pollutant concentrations. According to SCAQMD established criteria, this could present a
significant impact if these concentrations were to exceed the daily thresholds. As presented in Tables I and 2,
project construction emissions are all below the established thresholds. Consequently, project impacts relative to
exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant.
e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
X
111. e). No Impacts. Although emissions are associated with project construction, these impacts would be short-term
and are not expected to generate odors that would be objectionable to a substantial number of people. No other
odors are associated with the proposed path improvements. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts related to
creation of objectionable odors affecting substantial numbers of people are expected to occur.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modification, on any species
identified as candidate, sensitive or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
X
IV. a). Less Than Significant with Mitigation. The project site is located within an urbanized area. BaIlona Creek is a
concrete channel. Review of project site aerials and field surveys by project landscape architects indicate that no
native vegetation occurs on or adjacent to the project site. As part of the project, new native drought-tolerant
landscaping would be planted adjacent to the path. The site itself does not contain species identified as candidate,
sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife.
However, 14 existing trees would be removed to accommodate project improvements. These trees to be removed
consist of 7 Cypress, 6 Eucalyptus, and 1 Podocarpus. Although each of these trees is non-native, they are of
adequate height and foliage to attract nesting birds. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects nesting
birds. First enacted in 1916, the MBTA prohibits any person to: "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take,
capture, or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase " any migratory
bird. The statute was extended in 1974 to include parts of birds and eggs and nests. It is illegal under MBTA to
directly kill, or destroy a nest of any migratory bird species. Activities that result in removal or destruction of an
active nest (a nest with eggs or young being attended by one or more adults) would violate the MBTA. Removal of
unoccupied nests would not represent violations of the MBTA.
Nesting activity typically occurs from February 15 to August 15. The removal of the existing trees during the
breeding season is considered a potentially significant impact of the proposed project. However, to ensure that
removal of the existing trees do not impact nesting birds, Mitigation Measure B10-1 is recommended for inclusion to
the project. This measure, provided below, would reduce potential impacts to migratory bird species to a less than
Bailouts. Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 15
Initial Study
20significant level.
B10-1: Mitigation for the potential impacts to nesting birds will be accomplished in one of two ways. First,
efforts will be made to schedule all vegetation removal activities outside the nesting season to avoid potential
impacts to nesting birds. The nesting season is typically February 15-August 15. This would insure that no
active nests would be disturbed and that tree removal could proceed rapidly. Secondly, if initial vegetation
removal occurs during the nesting season, all trees to be removed will be thoroughly surveyed for the
presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist before commencement of clearing. If any active nests are
detected, a buffer of at least 100 feet (as determined by the monitoring biologist) will be delineated, flagged,
and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete as determined by the biological monitor to minimize impacts.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling hydrological interruption, or
other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservancy
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
IV. b), c), d),e), O. No Impact. The project site is located within an urbanized area. Ballona Creek is a concrete channel.
No existing natural waterway or native vegetation occurs on the project site. The site does contain species identified
as candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife. The site does not contain identified riparian habitats or
other sensitive natural communities. The site does not function as a wildlife corridor or wildlife nursery. There are
no local policies, ordinances or habitat conservation plans applicable to the site. Consequently, the project would not
significantly impact sensitive habitats or wildlife movement or nurseries, nor conflict with preservation policies or
plans. .
Balboa Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 16
Initial Study
21V. CULTURAL AND RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significant of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
X
V. a). No Impact. The project site is an existing paved path adjacent to an existing concrete channel. No structures
occur on the site. Consequently, the site does not contain any potential historic resources. Therefore, the project
would not cause a substantial adverse change to a significant historical resource.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
X
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
d) Disturb any human remains including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
V. b), c), d). Less Than Significant. The project would involve the construction of landscaping and path improvements
that would occur above the top of the channel bank. The areas proposed for these improvements have been
previously disturbed as part of the construction of the creek channel, bike path, and surrounding development years
ago. The project proposes minimal grading (154 cubic yards (CY) of cut, and 451 CY of fill). Consequently, the
project's potential to cause a substantial adverse impact to archaeological resources is less than significant.
The Culver City General Plan EIR identified that past geologic and hydrologic conditions have created a significant
deposit of alluvium within some areas of the City. The associated expectation of fossilized marine and terrestrial
remains within these deposits indicates a moderate to high likelihood of discovering paleontological resources within
these areas. However, proposed landscaping and path improvements would require minimal ground disturbing
activities. Excavation would occur only within the uppermost few feet of soil, where there has been previous
disturbance; and consequently, the project's potential to cause a substantial adverse impact to paleontological
resources is less than significant.
Given the extensive previous development of the area and the minimal excavation involved in the project, it is
unlikely that human remains would be encountered during construction. Consequently, the project's potential to
disturb human remains is less than significant.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
Page 17 Balboa Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Initial Studyiv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
X
Vi. a),b),c),d). Less Than Significant According to the City General Plan, the project site is not located within an Alquist
Priolo Fault Zone, but it is on top of the Overland Fault, which is a potentially active fault. The project proposes
minimal grading, 154 CY of cut and 451 CY of fill with fill being used mainly to backfill the slope behind the
retaining wall.
Design and construction of the path is required to comply with standard City codes and standards. Further, because
the project does not include any structures, potential impacts relative to seismic hazards is considered less than
significant. No other conditions have been identified in past records or studies that indicate unstable earth
conditions or changes in geological substructures. Consequently, project impacts to the above listed geology and soils
topics are considered less than significant.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
X
Vi. e). No Impact. No septic facilities are associated with the project. Therefore, soils capacity to support the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems is not relevant to the project.
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
X
VII. a). Less Than Significant. The main greenhouse gases (GHG) in the atmosphere are water vapor, carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. GHG trap heat, causing a "greenhouse effect" or heating at the surface of the
earth or moon.' Global warming, a recent warming of the earth's temperature, is believed to be the result of an
enhanced greenhouse effect mostly due to human-produced increases in atmospheric GHG.
Development activity most directly contributes to carbon dioxide (CO2). Project construction activities would
include truck and machinery operation, both of which would consume fuel. The burning of fuel emits CO2 and
generates greenhouse gas. As shown in Tables I and 2, project construction would generate 2,349.49 pounds (or
0.001 ton) per day of CO2. According to the 2007 AQMP, by year 2010, emission levels for the state of California
I
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, "What is the Greenhouse Effect?", Cambridge University
Press, 2001.
Batlona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 18
Initial Study 2 3are estimated to reach 568.4 million tons of CO2 equivalent per year (or 1,561,538 tons per day). Project
construction at 0.001 ton of CO2 per day would represent 0.000000001 (0%) of the state's 2010 daily total, a
negligible contribution to statewide GHG.
Operation of the bikeway would involve primarily bike and pedestrian activities, neither of which would consume fuel
nor generate notable amounts of CO2 or other GHG. Vehicular emissions from project operation would be limited
to maintenance vehicles that would visit the path approximately 52 times per year. The proposed landscaping would
be drought tolerant, requiring minimal amounts of water; and the proposed lighting would be solar-activated.
Electrical energy required to operate the call-boxes and cameras is expected to be nominal. By encouraging bike and
pedestrian travel, the project's operation can be considered CO2 neutral, i.e., it discourages more CO2 emissions
than it generates.
At this time, GHG are not regulated as a criteria pollutant and there are no established significance criteria for CO2
emissions. Lacking such thresholds, for the purposes of this analysis, project impacts relative to GHG are considered
less than significant.
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or
regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
VII. B). No Impact. In 2005, in recognition of California's vulnerability to the effects of climate change, Governor
Schwarzenegger established Executive Order S-3-05, which sets forth a series of target dates by which statewide
emission of GHG would be progressively reduced, as follows:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
In 2006, California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32; California Health and Safety
Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq.), which requires CARB to design and implement emission limits,
regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide greenhouse gas emissions are
reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in emissions). SB 375, signed into
law in September 2008, builds on AB 32 by restricting land use sprawl and encouraging sustainable growth. The bill
contains the following key provisions:
• Creation of regional targets for greenhouse gas emissions reduction tied to land use_
• A requirement that regional planning agencies create a plan to meet those targets, even if that plan is in
conflict with local plans.
• A requirement that regional transportation funding decisions be consistent with this new plan.
• Tethering together regional transportation planning and housing efforts for the first time.
• New CEQA exemptions and streamlining for projects that conform to the new regional plans, even if they
conflict with local plans.
State and regional policies that implement AB 32 and SB 375 are currently being developed. However, preliminary
guidance provided by SCAG indicates that policies that encourage non-vehicular travel are generally considered
GHG positive. As discussed above, by encouraging bike and pedestrian travel, the project's operation can be
considered CO2 neutral, i.e., it discourages more CO2 emissions than it generates. Consequently, the project is not
expected to conflict with policies or regulations established to reduce GHG.
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
X
Sallona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 19
Initial Study
24-Bat/ma Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Initial Study
Page 20
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the Project
Area?
X
I) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the Project
Area?
X
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildIand fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
.
X
VW. a),b),c),d),e),0,0,h)). No
impact. The proposed project would improve and an existing bike path and would not
involve the routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials beyond the use of chemicals commonly used in
landscaping activities. The Culver City High School/Middle School/Elementary School/Adult School complex is located
adjacent to the north bank path along the creek Any chemicals used in landscaping maintenance activities would be
similar to those used to maintain landscaping on school grounds, and would not be expected to have significant adverse
impacts on the student population. The Ballona Creek path is not on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5. Culver City's segment of the Ballona Creek path is not located within two miles
of a public or private airport. Construction vehicles and activities for project improvements are anticipated to be
confined to the top bank of the creek channel and are not anticipated to obstruct public roadways or otherwise impair
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project area is urbanized, and no wildland fire
areas are located directly adjacent to the path or proposed improvements. Consequently, no potential significant
adverse impacts from the proposed project relative to the above-listed hazards or hazardous materials are expected
occur.IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would
the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
X
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which peimits
have been granted)?
X
. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
X
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
X
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
0 Otherwise substantially degrade water vality? X
Page 21 Banana Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Initial StudyNEW SYCAMORES (TYP)
NEW RETAINING
WALL AND LOW
PLANTINGS
NEW DECORATIVE GATE
EXISTING
SECURITY CAMERA
NEW POST LIGHT WITH
THREE SECURITY
-CAMERAS
k.OW PLAKIT—ING
PEDESTRIAN PATH-- CUTOUT (TYP)
TURNOUT, PATH
-.TERMINATES HERE
CAUTION SIGN
-- 'DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE-----
TO LINDBERG PAR(
-
-,
PLANTING AREA
(TYP)
IX a) b), c), d), e), f). Less Than Significant. The project plans to improve an existing path and incorporate applicable
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements adopted on March 8, 2000, by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region. The project meets these requirements through
installation of a bioswale system that filters storm water drainage then allows it to spillover into the creek The
bioswale is located along the western end of the path. (See Exhibit 8, Project Bioswale System, below.) The project
also proposes to install educational displays along the path including information on storm water pollution prevention
utilizing the nearby Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS).
As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. EPA has established regulations under the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to control storm water discharges, including construction activities.
The project does not propose substantial grading, and would be conditioned as part of the County and City permit
review process to comply with NPDES best management practices (BMPs) for erosion control during construction
would reduce water quality impacts to below a level of significance.
The proposed improvements would occur on the top of the channel levee and would not alter the existing drainage
pattern along the creek. Although the project proposes drought tolerant landscaping, irrigation to support with new
landscaping along the creek will be required. This may result in runoff into the creek channel. However, the impacts
of introducing irrigation to the project site maybe partially or completely offset by the inclusion in the project design
of the bioswale/infiltration system. Currently some of the water falling on to the concrete slope runs off into the
creek. The project would replace this concrete slope with landscaping and the proposed bioswale/infiltration system,
which is designed to allow water to infiltrate into the soil before reaching the creek. Because the plants will be
drought tolerant, any increase in water use is anticipated to be less than significant and would not result in substantial
erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or offsite.
Therefore, the potential for the project to result in adverse impacts to relative to the above listed hydrology and water
quality topics is considered less than significant.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 22
Initial Study
27Exhibit 8: Project Bioswaie System
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
X
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
X
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
X
j) Inundation by seiche or mudflow? . X
Xi. 0, g), h), i). No Impact. All project construction activities would be located above the top of the channel bank and
outside the 100-year floodplain, as identified by Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) for Culver City (NFIP, 1980). The project would not place housing or structures that
would impede flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area. The project is an existing bikeway and pedestrian
path, located above an existing channelized creek. In the event of an anticipated rain storm Los Angeles County
Public Works crews lock all access gates to the creek to preclude bike/pedestrian access until the storm event has
ended. Risks associated with inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would not increase because of proposed path
improvements. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to cause adverse impacts relative to the above
listed hydrology and water quality topics.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signifi cant
With gation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would theyroject:
a) Physically divide an established community')
X
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X
Balboa Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 23
Initial Study
2?)X. a), b), c). No impact The project would enhance the aesthetics and function of an existing bike path and would not
physically divide an established community. The Ballona Creek path system is identified as open space and important
recreation resource in the City General Plan. The proposed improvements are consistent with the General Plan and
the site is permitted in Open Space (OS) Zone. The project site is urbanized and not located within an adopted
habitat conservation plan area. Consequently, no adverse impacts relative to the above listed land use and planning
topics are expected to occur because of the project.
XL MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
X
XL a), b). No Impact. The project site is an existing bike path. Surrounding areas are urbanized, developed w th public and
residential uses. There are no identified mineral resources on or proximate to the project site Therefore, potential
impacts on the environment due to a loss of availability of known regionally or locally important mineral resources are not
relevant to the project.
XII. NOISE. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
X
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
X
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
X
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 24
laitial Stady
247XII. a), b), c), d). Less than Significant. According to the City's Noise Element of the General Plan, a "Noise Sensitive
Receptor" would be any location where excessive noise levels would interfere with an individual's normal sleeping
activities, normal conversation, or ability to work (City of Culver City 1996). Local sensitive land uses include
residential, schools and library land uses that are distributed along the creek. The Culver City High School, Culver
City Middle School, Culver City Adult School, Farragut Elementary School, and the Culver City Julian Dixon Library
are located along the northwest side of the bike path. Noise associated with the project would be from bicycles
traveling along the path and from pedestrians or cyclists talking. These noises are expected to be intermittent. Also,
because the path is already in use, the increase in noise as a result of proposed improvements is expected to be less
than significant. Noise associated with construction of proposed improvements would be short-term and would be
regulated by the City noise ordinance, which restricts hours of construction between 8 am. and 7 p.m., Monday
through Friday and 9 a.m. and 7 p.m., Saturday. Consequently, potential project impacts associated with the above
noise topics would be less than significant.
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the Project Area to excessive noise
levels?
X
1) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people residing
or working in the Project Area to excessive noise
levels?
X
XII. e), f). No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of an airport to private air strip. Therefore, the
potential for impacts due to noise associated with air traffic is not relevant to the project.
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
X
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
X
XIII. a),b),c). No Impact. The project will improve an existing bike path. It is consistent with the City General Plan. It
would not induce substantial population growth, or displace an existing house or persons. The project is not expected
to result in potential significant impacts relative to population and housing.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 25
Initial StudyXIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant Environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less than
Significant With Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection?
XIV. a), b). Less Than Significant. The proposed new lighting, fencing, emergency "call-boxes" and surveillance camera to
be installed as part of the project are expected to increase safety along the path. As part of the City's design process,
the proposed landscape design was subject to review and approval of the Culver City Police Department. This review
ensured the plant materials are of adequate spacing to avoid creating obscured areas which could attract criminal
activity. The proposed path improvements could encourage more users, with a potential for an increased need for
Police and Fire Protection Services along the path. However, the expected increase in path usership and concomitant
need for Police and Fire Protection Services are expected to be less than significant. The need for police services
would be offset by the proposed new lighting, fencing, emergency "call-boxes", surveillance camera and adequately
spaced landscaping. These features also are expected to enhance the ability of fire protection services to respond to
calls on the path. Therefore, the project impacts relative to the above listed Police and Fire Protection Service topics
are expected to be less than significant.
. Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
XIV. c), d), e). No Impact. The project will improve an existing bike path. It would not result in the need for increased
local capabilities for schools, parks or other public facilities, as new paths, fencing, lighting, and vegetation would not
increase demand for these services. Therefore, the project is not expected to result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school, park or other governmental facilities in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services.
XV. RECREATION:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
13) Does the project include recreational facilities or X
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 26
Initial Study
3/require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities that might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
XV. a) Less than Significant, h). No impact. The project would improve an existing bike path, enhancing recreational
opportunities for the community consistent with the City General Plan. The projects site's western end is
approximately 1,000 feet from an existing neighborhood park (Lindberg Park). The project has the potential to
increase access to and use of Lindberg Park. However, any increase is not expected to result in significant increased
use, and is expected to be adequately accommodated by the proposed path improvements. Potential impacts
associated with construction of the project recreational facilities are addressed as part of this environmental assessment,
and are expected to have impacts that are less than significant. Consequently, potential project impacts relative to the
above-listed recreation topics are expected to be less than significant.
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/ TRAFFIC. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness for
the performance of the circulation system, taking
into account all modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including
but not limited to intersections, streets, highways
•
and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit
X
XVI. a) Less than Significant. The project would improve an existing bikeway that is identified in the City of Culver
City General Plan as the Ballona Creek Focused Special Study Area. The proposed improvements are consistent with
the established General Plan provisions for the area. The improvements are intended to enhance bicycle and
pedestrian travel for existing trail recreational users, students, library patrons, and nearby residents. Vehicular traffic
associated with project construction would consist of worker vehicles and typical construction equipment and trucks.
Construction vehicles and activities are anticipated to be confined to the top bank of the creek channel and are not
anticipated to obstruct public roadways or otherwise interfere with vehicular traffic on public streets. Maintenance of
the path and landscaping would require small trucks to enter the path; however trips from maintenance vehicles are
expected to be approximately 52 per year. Consequently, project impacts relative to conflicts with an applicable
plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system are
expected to be less than significant
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not limited
to level of service standards and travel demand
measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
X
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 27
Initial StudyXVI. b).
No Impact. The City of Culver City follows the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program
(CMP), which pursuant to Proposition l I I supports regional mobility and air quality objectives by reducing traffic
congestion. As discussed above, the project would improve an existing bike path consistent with the established
General Plan provisions for the area. Vehicular traffic associated with project construction would consist of worker
vehicles and typical construction equipment and trucks, which would be confined to the top bank of the creek channel.
Trips from maintenance vehicles are expected to be approximately 52 per year. By encouraging bike and pedestrian
travel, the project is expected to support regional mobility and air quality objectives. Consequently, the project
would not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including conflict with an established
level of service_
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
X
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
X
XVI. d),e),0,g). No Impact.
The project would improve an existing bike path, and would generate a minimum amount of
vehicular traffic. Proposed improvements are consistent with General Plan policies. Construction vehicles and activities
are anticipated to be confined to the top bank of the creek channel and are not anticipated to obstruct public roadways
or otherwise impair emergency access. No vehicular parking spaces are required for the project. There would be ample
room along the 12-foot bike path and adjacent 3-foot pedestrian path for the maintenance vehicles to park during their
periodic visits. By enhancing bike and pedestrian paths, the project would encourage alternative (non-vehicular)
transportation. Consequently, project impacts to the above listed transportation issues are not anticipated.
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
• With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
X
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project as projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
X
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 28
Initial Study
33d) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
X
e) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or new or expanded entitlements
needed?
X|10 9| Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs?
X
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
XVII. a), b), c), d), e), f), g). No Impact. The project would provide a bioswa e/infiltration system. It would not result in
an exceedance of RWQCB treatment requirements. The project would not change the creek alignment. Using
drought tolerant plant materials, the project demand for water is expected to be minimal. The project does not
propose any facilities that would generate wastewater or solid waste. Materials removed from the site during project
grading would be recycled in compliance with AB 939, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 that
requires local jurisdictions to recycle up to 50% of their solid waste, or transferred to a landfill. The amount of waste
material is not expected to exceed landfill capacity.
Therefore, the project is not expected to result in any adverse physical impacts relative to the above listed utility and
service system topics.
Balboa Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 29
Initial Study
3€XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
A. Does the project have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause
a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or an endangered threatened species,
or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
X
XVIII. A Less Than Significant. As discussed in item IV above, the project proposes to remove trees that could contain
nesting birds, the disturbance of which would violate the M BTA. To ensure that removal of the existing trees do not
impact nesting birds, Mitigation Measure B10- I is recommended for inclusion to the project. This measure would
reduce potential impacts to migratory bird species to a less than significant level. No other significant adverse impacts
relative to biological or cultural resources are associated with the Project. Therefore, project impacts relative to the
substantial degradation of the quality of the environment would be less than significant.
B. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Are the
incremental effects of the project considerable when
viewed in connection with those of past projects,
those of other current projects, and those of probable
future projects).
X
XVIII. B. No Impact. No significant project-levels are expected to occur as a result of the project. Consequently, the
Project will not contribute to a significant, cumulative impact.
C. Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
XVIII. C. No Impact. The project would enhance an existing bikeway, improving its appearance, function and safety. No
significant project-levels are expected to occur as a result of the project. The project is not expected to result in a
substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The following environmental mitigation measure shall be incorporated into the project development as a condition of
approval. The project applicant shall secure a signed verification for the mitigation measure that indicates that the measure
has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City environmental and other requirements (Public Resources
Code Section 21081.6.) Final clearance shall require all applicable verifications as included in the following table. The
Culver City Community Development Department and Public Works Department have joint primary responsibility for
monitoring and reporting the implementation of the mitigation measure. The mitigation measure is identified by impact
category and numbered for ease of reference.
BalIona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 30
Initial StudyMITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
BALLONA CREEK BIKEWAY PROJECT, P-900
Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021)
MITIGATION MEASURE TIMING VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
DEPARTMENT: 1 SIGNATURE: I DATE:
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
B10-1: Mitigation for the potential impacts to nesting birds
will be accomplished in one of two ways. First, efforts will be
made to schedule all vegetation removal activities outside the
nesting season to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds.
The nesting season is typically February IS-August 15. This
would insure that no active nests would be disturbed and that
tree removal could proceed rapidly. Secondly, if initial
vegetation removal occurs during the nesting season, all trees
to be removed will be thoroughly surveyed for the presence
of nesting birds by a qualified biologist before commencement
of clearing. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least
100 feet (as determined by the monitoring biologist) will be
delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is
complete as determined by the biological monitor to
minimize impacts.
Prior to any
clearing,
grubbing or
demolition
within 100-feet
of the existing
trees to be
removed.
Community
Development
Department; Public
Works
Department
SOURCES CITED IN EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits an environmental document to incorporate by reference other
documents that provide relevant data. The documents outlined below are hereby incorporated by reference, and the
pertinent material is summarized throughout this Initial Study where that information is relevant to the analysis of
impacts of the proposed project. All documents incorporated by reference are available for review at Culver City
Planning Division, 9770 Culver Boulevard, 21d floor, Culver City, CA 90232-0507 or 310/253-5710. The normal office
hours are Monday through Friday between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. except alternate Fridays, when City Hall is closed.
1. City of Culver City General Plan (current)
2. Final Draft, Program Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan Update (1995)
3. City of Culver City Municipal Code (current)
4. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study for the Ballona Creek And Path Focused Special Study Strategic Plan,
prepared by the Chambers Group, Inc. (July 2003.)
LIST BELOW THE PERSON OR PERSONS WHO PREPARED OR PARTICIPATED IN THE
PREPARATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY:
I. Environmental Consultant Joann Lombardo, Comprehensive Planning Services
2. Design Team Project Manager: Jaime Yamashita, Lawrence R. Moss & Associates
3. City Project Manager: Lee Torres, Culver City Public Works Department.
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 31
Initial StudyAPPENDIX A
URBEMIS Air Quality Model Run for Proposed Ballona Creek Bikeway Project
Ballona Creek Bikeway Project
Page 32
Initial StudyUrbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4
Summary Report for Summer Emissions (Pounds/Day)
Project Name: BaIlona Creek Bike Trail
Project Location: California State-wide
On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006
Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 CO2
Dust Exhaust Dust
2010 3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 1.25 5.06 0.80 1.15 1.95 2,349.48
TOTALS
(lbs/day )
2011
2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.80 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 2,349.51
TOTALS
(lbsiday)
Average 2.95 24.27 13.27 0.00 3.80 1.21 5.02 0.80 1.12 2,349.49 2,349.49
TOTALS
(lbs/day)
Detail Report for Summer Construction Emissions (Pounds/Day)
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10
Dust
PM10 PM10 PM2.5
Dust
PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Exhaust Total Exhaust
Time Slice 1.18 7.74 5.78 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.54 0.54 802.46
Active Days: 23
Demolition 1.18 7.74 5.78 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.54 0.54 802.46
Fugitive 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dust
Demo Off 1.14 7.68 4.68 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.54 0.54 700.30
Road
Diesel
Demo On 0.00 0.00 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Road
Diesel
Demo 0.04 0.06 1.10 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.16
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 1.25 5.06 0.80 1.15 1.95 2,349.48
Active Days: 22
Fine Grading 3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 1.25 5.06 0.80 1.15 1.95 2,349.48
Fine - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.80 0.00 3.80 0.79 0.00 0.79 0.00
Grading
Dust
Fine 3.00 24.99 12.46 0.00 0.00 1.25 1.25 0.06 1.15 1.15 2,247.32 .
Grading
Off Road
Diesel
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading
On Road
Diesel
Fine 0.04 0.06 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.16
Grading
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.88 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 2.34951
Active Days: 15
Fine Grading 2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.80 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 2,349.51
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.80 0.00 3.80 0.79 0.00 0.79 0.00
Grading
Dust
Fine 2.83 23.44 11.96 0.00 0.00 1.17 1.17 0.00 1.08 1.08 2,247.32
Grading
Off Road
Ballona Creek Bikeway Project
Page 33
Initial Study
•*$Diesel
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading
On Road
Diesel
Fine 0.03 0.06 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.19
Grading
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 1.91 11.42 8.71 0.00 0.01 0.98 0.99 0.00 0.90 0.91 1,167.92
Active Days: 22
Asphalt 1.91 11.42 8.71 0.00 0.01 0.98 0.99 0.00 0.90 0.91 1,167.92
Paving 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Gas
Paving 1.83 11.26 6.91 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.90 0.90 979.23
Off Road
Diesel
Paving 0.00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.86
On Road
Diesel
Paving 0.06 0.10 1.78 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 178.84
Worker
.
Trips
Time Slice 1.20 8.88 7.07 0.00 0.01 0.56 0.67 0.00 0.51 0.52 1,166.00
Active Days: 37
Building 1.20 8.88 7.07 0.00 ' 0.01 0.56 0.57 0.00 0.51 0.52 1,166.00
Building 1.11 8.51 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.50 0.50 893.39
Off Road
Diesel
Building 0.02 • 0.25 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.97
Vendor
Trips
Building 0.07 0.12 2.18 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 218.64
Worker
Trips
Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4
Winter Report for Summer Emissions (Pounds/Day)
Project Name: Balboa Creek Bike Trail
Project Location: California State-wide
On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006
Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007
ROG NOx CO
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES
S02 PM10 Dust PM10 PM10 PM2.5 PM2.5 PM2.5 CO2
Exhaust Dust Exhaust
2010 TOTALS
(lbs/day)
3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 1.25 5.06 0.80 1.15 1.95 2,349.48
2011 TOTALS
(lbs/day)
2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.80 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 2,349.51
Average 2.95 24.27 13.27 0.00 3.80 1.21 6.23 0.80 1.12 2349.49
TOTALS
(lbs/day)
Detail Report for Winter Construction Emissions (Pounds/Day)
ROG NOx CO S02 PM10 PM10 PM10 PM2.5 Pk12.5 PM2.6 Total CO2
Dust Exhaust Total Dust Exhaust
Time Slice 1.18 7.74 5.78 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.54 0.54 802.46
Active Days: 23
Demolition 1.18 7.74 5.78 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0.54 0.54 . 802.46
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 34
Initial StudyFugitive 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dust
Demo Off 1.14 7,68 4.68 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.59 0.00 0,54 0.54 700.30
Road
Diesel
Demo On 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Road
Diesel
Demo 0.04 0.06 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.16
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 125 506 0.80 t15 1.95 2,349.48
Active Days: 22
Fine Grading 3.04 25.05 13.56 0.00 3.80 1.25 5.06 0.80 1.15 1.95 2,349.48
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0L00 3.80 0,00 3.80 0.79 0.00 0.79 0.00
Grading
Dust
Fine 3.00 24.99 12.46 0,00 0.00 1.25 1.25 0.00 1.15 1.15 2,247.32
Grading
Off Road
Diesel
Fine 0.00 • 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading
On Road
Diesel
Fine 0.04 0.06 1.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.16
Grading
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.80 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 • 2 349.51
Active Days: 15
Fine Grading 2.86 23.49 12.98 0.00 3.80 1.17 4.98 0.80 1.08 1.88 2,349.51
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 3.80 0.00 3.80 0.79 0.00 0.79 0.00
Grading
Dust
Fine . 2.83 23.44 11.96 0.00 0.00 1.17 1.17 0.00 1.08 1.08 2,247.32
Grading
Off Road
Diesel
Fine 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading
On Road
Diesel
Fine 0.03 0,06 1,02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 102.19
Grading
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 1.91 11.42 8.71 0.00 0.01 0.98 0.99 0.00 0.90 0.91 1,167.92
Active Days: 22
Asphalt 1.91 11.42 8.71 0.00 0.01 0.98 0.99 0.00 0.90 0.91 1,167.92
Paving 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off-Gas
Paving 1.83 11.26 6.91 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.90 0,90 979.23
Off Road
Diesel
Paving 0.00 0.06 0.02 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.86
On Road
Diesel
Paving 0.06 0.10 1.78 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 - 0.00 0.01 178.84
Worker
Trips
Time Slice 1.20 8.88 7.07 0.00 0.01 0,56 0.57 0.00 0.51 0.52 1,166.00
Active Days: 37
Building 1.20 8.88 7.07 0.00 0.01 0.56 0.57 0.00 0.51 0.52 1,166.00
Building 1.11 8.51 4.68 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.50 0.50 893.39
Off Road
Diesel
Building 0.02 0.25 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 53.97
Vendor
Trips
Ballona Creek Bikeway Improvement Project
Page 35
Initial StudyBuilding 0.07 0.12 2.18 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 218.64
Worker
Trips
Phase Assumptions (Both Summer and Winter)
Phase: Demolition - Default Fine Site Grading Description
Building Volume Total (cubic feet): 0
Building Volume Daily (cubic feet): 0
On ROad Truck Travel (VMT): 0
Off-Road Equipment:
1 Concrete/Industrial Saws (10 hp) operating at a 0.73 load factor for 8 hours per day
1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at a 0.59 load factor for 1 hours per day
2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 6 hours per day
Phase: Fine Grading - Default Paving Description
Total Acres Disturbed: 0.77
Maximum Daily Acreage Disturbed: 0.19
Fugitive Dust Level of Detail: Default
20 lbs per acre-day
On Road Truck Travel (VMT): 0
Off-Road Equipment:
1 Graders (174 hp) operating at a 0.61 load factor for 6 hours per day
1 Rubber Tired Dozers (357 hp) operating at .a 0.59 load factor for 6 hours per day
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day
1 Water Trucks (189 hp) operating at a 0.5 load factor for 8 hours per day
Phase: Paving - Default Building Construction Description
Acres to be Paved: 0.19
Off-Road Equipment:
4 Cement and Mortar Mixers (10 hp) operating at a 0.56 load factor for 6 hours per day
1 Pavers (100 hp) operating at a 0.62 load factor for 7 hours per day
1 Rollers (95 hp) operating at a 0.56 load factor for 7 hours per day
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 7 hours per day
Phase: Building Construction - Irrigation, Landscaping, Site Amenities
Off-Road Equipment:
1 Cranes (399 hp) operating at a 0.43 load factor for 4 hours per day
2 Forklifts (145 hp) operating at a 0.3 load factor for 6 hours per day
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes (108 hp) operating at a 0.55 load factor for 8 hours per day
Ballona Creek Bikeway improvement Projcct
Page 36
Initial Study
4RESOLUTLON NO. 2010-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CULVER CITY,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
THE BALLONA CREEK BIKEWAY AND LANDSCAPING PROJECT
(OVERLAND TO PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE), P-900, FEDERAL AID PROJECT
NO. ESPL-5240 (021).
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2007, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
adopted Resolution No 07-03, authorizing a grant for planning and design of the Ballona
Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge), P-900,
Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021) (the "Project"), and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2007, the City Council approved a contract with
Lawrence R. Moss & Associates to provide planning and design services for the Project, and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2007, the City Council approved Preliminary
Conceptual Plans for the Project, and
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2010, in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, finding the project will not result in significant adverse environmental impacts,
provided certain mitigation measures related to Biological Resources are implemented
and that the Project is consistent with the Culver City Municipal Code, the Open Space
(OS)Zone, and the City's General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CULVER CID(,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council hereby approves the plans and spedfications for BaIlona
Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue tb Pedestrian Bridge), P-900,
Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021); and
Page 1ATTESTED BY: APPROVED TO AS FORM:
MARTIN R. COLE, City Clerk L A. SCHWAB, City Attorney
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of May, 2010.
CHRISTOPHER ARMENTA, Mayor
City of Culver City, California|1010101010101010
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Page 2
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (by N. Kimball) (04/28/10)
City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Meeting Date 05/03/2010
Item Number: C-4
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: (1) Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration;
(2)Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Final Plans and Specifications; and
(3) Authorization to Advertise for Bids for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and
Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge), P-900 - American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Federal Stimulus Funds), Federal Aid Project
No ESPL-5240 (021).
Contact Person/Dept.: Lee Torres/PW
Phone Number: 310-253-5623
Fiscal Impact Yes
El
General Fund: Yes
[X]
, Public Hearing:
Action Item [X
Attachments: [X]
Commission Action Required: Yes 0 No [X] Date: Public Notification: (E-Mail) Agenda and Meetings — City Council (04/28/10) and Santa
Monica Mountains Conservancy (04/22/10); (USPS) All property owners : and
Occupants within 300-ft radius of the .project site, all attendees of the July and August
2007 community workshops and those pet.SOnS who submitted verbal or Written
comments ::December 8, 2003 i Council discussion the Ballona Creek Focus
Special Study; Los Angeles County Department of ipUbliCE)/Vorkt, : : :COOntni: Of : LOS
Angeles Public Library, Culver City Unified School District, Mountains Recreation and
COMSer*atiOn :Atithority i:Santa ::Monida t3'.6'. ::: : ReStoratiOn: :!CoMitiSsiOn and Ballona::Creek
: Renaissance : (04/19/10.).
Department Approval:
Charles D. Herbertson (04/22/10)
City Attorney :Approval:
Carol Schwab . (by :H :. Baker) (04/27/10):
City Manager Approval:
P.:::LEffigotE*0:(04/28/10)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study finding that the
project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided
certain mitigation(s) are implemented; and,
2. Adopt a Resolution approving the final plans and specifications for the Ballona
Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian
Bridge), P-900, Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021); and,
3. Authorize advertising for bids for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping
Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge), P-900, Federal Aid Project No.
ESPL-5240 (021).City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
BACKGROUND/ DISCUSSION:
The pl6nning and design services for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscape
Project were funded by Proposition 50 Grant Funds, which were obtained through
the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. On July 9, 2007, Lawrence R. Moss &
Associates (Design Team) was approved by City Council to provide planning and
design services on this project.
During the planning process, Staff and the Design Team conducted public outreach
via workshops with the local community. The workshops provided the community
with a forum to voice opinions, to have an active role in the planning process, and
assist Staff and the Design Team in refining the conceptual design.
The Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project intends to transform the bike
path by enhancing and utilizing the following improvements:
• Removal and rehabilitations of plantings along the Julian Dixon Public Library
and adjacent County service roadway.
• Installation of a decomposed granite (DG) pedestrian path and planting of
drought tolerant and Southern California native plants appropriate to the creek
habitat and installation of a low-volume water conserving irrigation system from
Overland Avenue to the Pedestrian Bridge. (Some existing trees in this area
would be retained in place).
• Removal of the concrete embankment along the upslope side of the bike path
(between the bike path and the school properties) and replacement with a DG
pedestrian path, retaining wall and terraced landscaping utilizing drought tolerant
and Southern California native plants appropriate to the creek habitat and low-
volume water conserving irrigation systems.
• Installation of new, enhanced fencing between the service roadway and creek
channel and between the bike path and creek channel.
• Installation of a new, enhanced entry gate at the service roadway entrance to the
creek located off of Overland Avenue and adjacent to the library building.
• Repavement of the bike path from Overland Avenue to the Pedestrian Bridge.
• Installation of pedestrian lighting, emergency "call-boxes," and security cameras
from Overland Avenue to the Pedestrian Bridge.
• Installation of educational displays regarding the creek and the project.
• Installation of drainage devices and a bio-swale to capture storm run-off.
City Staff and the Design Team also worked closely with staff from Culver City
Unified School District, County of Los Angeles Public Works Department, andCity of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
County of Los Angeles Public Library throughout the planning and design process to
address their concerns. All three impacted agencies have supported the proposed
project and have provided assistance in the approval and permitting process. All
necessary permits or rights-of-entries will be secured prior to construction.
Staff and the Design Team have finalized the construction specifications and plans.
A complete set of plans and specifications is available for review at the City Clerk's
Office in City Hall.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Initial Study have been prepared. The project has been
determined to have less than significant impacts on the community and environment
provided a certain mitigation related to Biological Resources is implemented.
As proposed, 14 existing trees would be removed to accommodate project
improvements. These trees to be removed consist of 7 Cypress, 6 Eucalyptus, and
1 Podocarpus. Although each of these trees is non-native, they are of adequate
height and foliage to attract nesting birds. Activities that result in removal or
destruction of an active nest would violate the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) which protects nesting birds. Removal of unoccupied nests would not
represent a violation of the MBTA.
Nesting activity typically occurs from February 15 to August 15. The removal of the
existing trees during the breeding season is considered a potentially significant
impact of the proposed project. However, to ensure that removal of the existing
trees do not impact nesting birds, mitigation measure B10-1 is recommended for
inclusion in the project. (See attachment 3). This measure provided in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration-Initial Study (revised) dated April 5, 2010, would reduce
potential impacts to migratory bird species to a less than significant level.
The project is consistent with the Municipal Code, the Open Space (OS) Zone, and
with the City's General Plan.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
In February 2009, as part of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA —
Stimulus Funds) signed into federal law, Culver City was allocated $1,196,174 of
Highway Funds. Of this amount $126,174 were designated as partial funding for the
Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian
Bridge), $670,000 were designated for the Washington Boulevard PavementCity of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Rehabilitation Project, and $400,000 were designated for the Culver Boulevard
Pavement Resurfacing (the latter two projects were completed last year). The City
also received additional competitive ARRA - Stimulus funds (transportation
enhancement) for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping Project in the
amount of $350,000.
Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program Grants
On November 9, 2009, the City Council approved the submittal of a grant application
for the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP) Roadside
Recreation Program administered by the State of California's Natural Resources
Agency and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
The EEMP was established by the State Legislature in 1989. It offers a total of $10
million each year for grants to local, state, and federal governmental agencies and to
non-profit organizations for projects to mitigate the environmental impacts caused by
new or modified public transportation facilities.
Although the City was not initially successful in receiving these grant funds, the
project did rank highly, but just below the funding cutoff line. On March 22, 2010,
the City was notified of the possibility of receiving EEMP funds in the amount of
$349,911 due to another project dropping off the approved project list. On April 14,
2010, the California Transportation Commission approved the $349,911 EEMP grant
to be used for the construction of the Ballona Creek Bikeway and Landscaping
Project.
Estimated Project Expenses
Ballona Creek Bikeway and
Landscaping Project
$859,000
Construction Inspection Services &
Geotechnical Construction Services
$40,000
Total Estimated Project Expenses $899,000
Available Funds
ARRA (Stimulus) Fund - Ballona
Creek Bikeway and Landscaping
Project
$476,174
Environment Enhancement and
Mitigation Program Grant
$349,911
Development Impact Fee $25,000
Available Funds $851,085City of Culver City, California
Agenda Item Report
Depending on the actual bid results, an additional $50,000 to $75,000 may be
required to fully fund the construction of this project.
When the request to award a contract is brought to the City Council in July, if
necessary, a budget amendment will be requested at that time to appropriate the
ARRA (Stimulus) and EEMP grant funding and other sources of funding for this
project.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Final Construction Plans and Specifications (To conserve resources, these
documents are not attached but are on file with City Clerk's office)
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study|109| Proposed Resolution
MOTIONS:
That the City Council:
1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study finding that the
project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided a
certain mitigation is implemented; and,
2. Adopt a Resolution approving the plans and specifications for Ballona Creek
Bikeway and Landscaping Proiect (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge),
P-900, Federal Aid Project No. ESPL-5240 (021); and,
3. Authorize the advertising for bids for the Ballona Creek Bikeway and
Landscaping Project (Overland Avenue to Pedestrian Bridge), P-900, Federal Aid
Project No. ESPL-5240 (021).